FRUIT OF THE LOOM, Inc.

vs CA and General Garment Corporation

FACTS:

Petitioner is the registrant of a trademark, FRUIT OF THE LOOM, in the Philippine

Patent Office and was issued two certificates of registration. The classes of merchandisecovered by the registration certificates are mens, womens and childrens underwear(the other registration certificate covers knitted, netted and textile fabrics). Privaterespondent is the registrant of a trademark FRUIT OF THE EVE covering garments similarto petitioners products like womens panties and pajamas.

Petitioner filed a complaint for infringement of trademark and unfair competition

alleging that the trademark FRUIT FOR THE EVE is confusingly similar to its trademark usedalso on womens underwear. It was also alleged that the color get-up and generalappearance of private respondents hang tag consisting of a big red apple is acolorable imitation to the hang tag of petitioner. Private respondent denied theforegoing allegations.

The lower court rendered judgment in favor of the petitioner. On appeal, thejudgment of the lower court was reversed.

ISSUE: Whether private respondents trademark FRUIT FOR EVE and its hang tag areconfusingly similar to petitioners and its hang tag so as to constitute infringement.

HELD: NO.

There is infringement of trademark when the use of the mark involved would belikely to cause confusion or mistake in the mind of the public or to deceive purchasersas to the origin or source of the commodity.

In determining whether the trademarks are confusingly similar, a comparison of

the word is not the only determining factor. The trademarks in their entirety as theyappear in their respective labels or hang tags must also be considered in relation to thegoods to which they are attached. The discerning eye must focus not only on thepredominant words but also on the other features appearing in both labels in order thathe may draw his conclusion whether one is confusingly similar to the other.

In the trademarks in question, the lone similar word is FRUIT. Standing by itself,FRUIT OF THE LOOM is wholly different from FRUIT FOR EVE for even the printing of thetrademark in both hang tags, the word FRUIT is not at all made dominant over the otherwords.

As to the design and coloring of the hang tags, the following differences areglaring and striking to the eye: 1. The shape of the petitioners hag tag is round that looks like a paper rolled a few inches in both ends; while that of the other is plain rectangle without any base. 2. The designs differ. Petitioners is written in almost semi-circle while that of the other is written in straight line in bigger letters than petitioners. Private respondents tag has only an apple in its center but that of petitioner has also clusters of grapes that surround the apple in the center. 3. The colors of the hang tag are also very distinct from each other. Petitioners hang tag is fight brown while that of Private respondents is pink with a white colored center piece. The apples which are the only similarities in the hang tag are differently colored. Petitioners apple is colored dark red, the other is light red.

The similarities in this case are completely lost in substantial differences in thedesign and general appearance of their respective hang tags. The two trademarks donot resemble each other as to confuse or deceive an ordinary purchaser. The ordinarypurchaser must be thought of as having, and credited with at least a modicum ofintelligence to be able to see the differences. Furthermore, a person who buyspetitioners products and starts to have a liking for it, will not get confused and reachout to the other.